<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (7) TMI 1044 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755824</link>
    <description>Madras HC quashed Provisional Attachment Orders under PMLA in money laundering case involving illegal sand mining proceeds. Court held respondents lacked jurisdiction as no scheduled offence was registered or investigated by any agency, and proceeds of crime were not determined. Despite evidence of illegal sand mining generating proceeds, attachment cannot proceed without prior registration and investigation of scheduled offence. Court emphasized attachment has serious consequences and cannot be based on assumptions. Respondents failed to specify exact scheduled offence or connect petitioners to any FIRs. Properties cannot be attached merely on premise of ill-gotten gains without established scheduled offence generating proceeds of crime.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2024 11:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=760792" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1044 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755824</link>
      <description>Madras HC quashed Provisional Attachment Orders under PMLA in money laundering case involving illegal sand mining proceeds. Court held respondents lacked jurisdiction as no scheduled offence was registered or investigated by any agency, and proceeds of crime were not determined. Despite evidence of illegal sand mining generating proceeds, attachment cannot proceed without prior registration and investigation of scheduled offence. Court emphasized attachment has serious consequences and cannot be based on assumptions. Respondents failed to specify exact scheduled offence or connect petitioners to any FIRs. Properties cannot be attached merely on premise of ill-gotten gains without established scheduled offence generating proceeds of crime.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755824</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>